"Ashton Crusher" > wrote in message
...
>
> So you view of the world is that we should ALL be held back to the
> level of the least capable among us. If we allow people on the road
> who are not capable of driving over 55 then we should ALL be limited
> to 55 eh? No thank you.
>
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I ABSOLUTELY think the speed limit
should be set for the least capable. If you raise the limits to the levels
of the most capable, you're basically saying: "I know lots of people won't
actually be safe driving that fast, but let em crash and cause mayhem if
they're not smart enough to slow down. We want to best drivers to be able to
go as fast as they can."

There should be a minimum requirement for getting a license, and the speed
limit and all the driving rules should be set so those minimally-qualified
people can drive safely without posing a danger to everyone else. It may be
inconvenient for some, but so are accidents, injuries and deaths. I don't
know where a lot of folks here drive, but where I drive (Connecticut and
Long Island) I see lots of people barely making it the way things are now. I
bet raising the speed limit on LI's Southern State Parkway from 55 to 85
would have catastrophic consequences. From what I see, I think most drivers
are terrible drivers. And the idea that we should let them go as fast as
they want so we can accommodate good drivers is just scary.

But the issue is not what I think. My question is the fact that many people
drive fast evidence in and of itself that there is public support for
raising the speed limit, as has been suggested here. In other words, I'm not
sure it's correct to conclude that the public votes for higher speed limits
every day by breaking current limits. I mean it MAY be the case. But it may
equally be the case that the public would say "I want to drive this fast,
but I don't want a lot other people driving this fast." I really would be
interested in seeing any surveys on this (not that I think speed limits
should be set by popular vote.)

--
Regards,
Anthony Giorgianni

The return address for this post is fictitious. Please reply by posting back
to the newsgroup.